Positions are up in the air at this point and Russell would most definitely be a primary ball handler at times if we drafted Ball, especially in the half court. This is one of the reasons why Ball is such a good fit because both can switch between the 1 and 2.

I must admit that i haven't seen Tatum or Fox on a regular basis, which is why i may be too hard on them.

But compared to Josh Jackson, i just think both falls way short because of Jacksons defensive ability, creativity offensively and overall competitiveness. He will be able to defend at a high level in the nba from day one and he will be able to contribute offensively, so there is a very low risk of him being a bust. If we need leadership, then [expletive]ing go with Josh Jackson, then flip Russell, Randle, Clarkson for PG13 and throw some money at Jrue Holiday and go with Jrue and 3 switchy do-it-all wings in Ingram/PG13/Jackson.

With Fox, i'm not predicting him to become Rondo, Rubio or Payton. I'm saying that PGs that cant shoot 3s really struggle in the modern nba. I will admit, that his FT% does give a bit of hope of him being able to learn to shoot, though.

One of the knocks on Jackson is he can fade to the background at times...and he passes up a LOT of outside shots because his mechanics are WILDLY inconsistent. His defensive intensity is there more often than not...and he's rumored to not have the best attitude off the court.

Tatum was injured the first part of the season, along with Giles...neither reached their potential this year and I suspect neither got up to 100% during the season...that said, Tatum was still an elite SF/PF prospect with his skills and potential as both a SF and stretch 4.

Fox has elite speed and athleticism...he's not nearly as polished as a floor general as Ball or even Fultz but he has just as high ceiling long term. He won't be the same type of PG but he could be just as deadly with a little bit of development on the little things that most guards need to work on coming in the NBA. It really depends on which team, system and coach gets him first.

If we need leadership, then [expletive]ing go with Josh Jackson, then flip Russell, Randle, Clarkson for PG13 and throw some money at Jrue Holiday and go with Jrue and 3 switchy do-it-all wings in Ingram/PG13/Jackson

If we need leadership, then [expletive]ing go with Josh Jackson, then flip Russell, Randle, Clarkson for PG13 and throw some money at Jrue Holiday and go with Jrue and 3 switchy do-it-all wings in Ingram/PG13/Jackson

Ingram/ Russell +Clarkson and Randle/ Jackson
Ill say it again ya never never trade for a rental empty cupboards like Knick 4 Melo dumb, wait build then when he comes he stays

If the Lakers think Ball is the second-best player in the draft, or a future franchise cornerstone, or the point guard to bring them to the next level, they should take him. But I don't think he fits any of those criteria.

If anything, the noise surrounding Lonzo's dad has helped distract people from valid questions about the UCLA star's game. As a prospect he's got a high floor—bigger Ricky Rubio—but there are reasons to be skeptical about his ceiling. We never really saw him score in the halfcourt at UCLA. It's not clear that he can create his own shot against NBA athletes. While he's incredible in transition, pushing the pace will be tougher in the NBA than it was against, say, Utah in the Pac-12.

His shooting numbers are good, but they begin to look a little more questionable upon closer investigation. His work in the pick-and-roll is underwhelming. Defensively he's long enough to potentially hold his own, but he doesn't have the athleticism to ever excel on that end.

The Lakers should take De'Aaron Fox. He is worlds better on defense. His jumper remains a work in progress, but his speed will allow him to drive defenses crazy in the meantime. He plays incredibly hard, and with his athleticism, it feels like he's only scratching the surface of what he'll be in five years.

I won’t lean too heavily on the two UCLA-Kentucky games this year with respect to Ball, but if nothing else they said a lot about what Fox can do. He got the better of Lonzo in the first matchup, and he flat out roasted him in the second.

Fox also fits with the other pieces L.A. already has in place. He's not a pure scorer, but the plan is to get that scoring from D'Angelo Russell, Brandon Ingram, and/or a max free agent that comes later. In the meantime, while Russell has shown real promise as an off-ball scorer, defense is still very much an issue—and Fox can help mitigate the damage.

Playing Lonzo and D'Angelo in the backcourt would do the opposite.They're both a step slow, and neither player seems particularly invested in locking anyone down. It'd be like a Hollywood answer to the most depressing Blazers games from this past season.

If the Lakers think Ball is the second-best player in the draft, or a future franchise cornerstone, or the point guard to bring them to the next level, they should take him. But I don't think he fits any of those criteria.

If anything, the noise surrounding Lonzo's dad has helped distract people from valid questions about the UCLA star's game. As a prospect he's got a high floor—bigger Ricky Rubio—but there are reasons to be skeptical about his ceiling. We never really saw him score in the halfcourt at UCLA. It's not clear that he can create his own shot against NBA athletes. While he's incredible in transition, pushing the pace will be tougher in the NBA than it was against, say, Utah in the Pac-12. His shooting numbers are good, but they begin to look a little more questionable upon closer investigation. His work in the pick-and-roll is underwhelming. Defensively he's long enough to potentially hold his own, but he doesn't have the athleticism to ever excel on that end.

The Lakers should take De'Aaron Fox. He is worlds better on defense. His jumper remains a work in progress, but his speed will allow him to drive defenses crazy in the meantime. He plays incredibly hard, and with his athleticism, it feels like he's only scratching the surface of what he'll be in five years.

I won’t lean too heavily on the two UCLA-Kentucky games this year with respect to Ball, but if nothing else they said a lot about what Fox can do. He got the better of Lonzo in the first matchup, and he flat out roasted him in the second.

Fox also fits with the other pieces L.A. already has in place. He's not a pure scorer, but the plan is to get that scoring from D'Angelo Russell, Brandon Ingram, and/or a max free agent that comes later. In the meantime, while Russell has shown real promise as an off-ball scorer, defense is still very much an issue—and Fox can help mitigate the damage. Playing Lonzo and D'Angelo in the backcourt would do the opposite.They're both a step slow, and neither player seems particularly invested in locking anyone down. It'd be like a Hollywood answer to the most depressing Blazers games from this past season.

Many people have pointed out the same things stated in this article. They've been ignored so far. People have their minds made up already. Personally, I'd take Ball over Fox but all of the points made about Ball were valid.

Many people have pointed out the same things stated in this article. They've been ignored so far. People have their minds made up already. Personally, I'd take Ball over Fox but all of the points made about Ball were valid.

Honestly I have Fultz at # 1 but Im torn at #2 Ball/Fox... I like both for obviously different reasons.

I like Ball and always have but I think people don't understand what type of player he is. He's not a LEAD guard. He's going to get assist like Draymond does. There is a difference in how Draymond/Griffin rack up assist vs John Wall and Russell Westbrook. He's going to be a secondary creator in halfcourt and can be a PG in early offense and transition.

You want to pair that type of guy with a scoring lead guard. Russell fits this mold. The worry is defense.

Jackson and LACAS like this

"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in" - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)

It's always amazing to me when people talk about Ball's weaknesses and then suggest Fox is the answer, they ignore Fox's weaknesses.

I know people hate LaVar but that shouldn't color how you see Lonzo...Ball is the BEST PG in this draft, period. If you want a scorer, pick Malik Monk...don't pick Fox expecting him to be better than Ball latter because Ball is already better and can BECOME better, just like Fox can BECOME better.

I know people hate LaVar but that shouldn't color how you see Lonzo...Ball is the BEST PG in this draft, period. If you want a scorer, pick Malik Monk...don't pick Fox expecting him to be better than Ball latter because Ball is already better and can BECOME better, just like Fox can BECOME better.